Early season scoring, part 2

[drumcat]

How say you?

[drumcat]

Varied opinions thus far... any thoughts for why?

[shawn craig]

I sometimes think that corps with a good reputation get some preferential treatment in early season scores, but SCV's scores from the very beginning last season proved that wrong.

Phantom moved nicely up in the rankings.

In 03 Cariolina Crown moved up in standings all season long.

I think that overall, the judges do a much better job than many give them credit for. And overall I agree with the placements, even when a favorite corps places lower than I want.

[bluestarsmello]

that's quite the poll there.

the hardest one to answer is the last one. i think judges like to be consistent in scoring because otherwise it makes the scores look arbitrary. with 135 people on the field, the performance isn't going to fluctuate as a group THAT much from night to night. i think it takes a substantial change in the program for the judges to let the score jump out of that expected median range, if that makes sense.

[drumcat]

It sounds like you're saying that you almost have to please the judges that you'll see at finals by making the changes they request -- aka "playing the game". Am I reading that right, Mello?

[dbc03]

It sounds like you're saying that you almost have to please the judges that you'll see at finals by making the changes they request -- aka "playing the game". Am I reading that right, Mello?

This is where some of the critique arguing comes in, but in the end a lot of times it can come down to either convincing the judge to see it your way or making some sort of compromise in the show.

[rgortowski]

Phantom moved nicely up in the rankings.

Because Phantom's staff did extensive re-writes and the corps responded to the challenge and vastly improved. I would say every change they made except for one was clearly superior to the original version. The difference between Show of Shows in Rockford and DCI finals was stunning. Those kind of big changes don't always work - see Cavaliers 1997 (Firebird Suite).

[drumcat]

So the Game really does seem to be important... are shows won and lost in critique then?

[dbc03]

So the Game really does seem to be important... are shows won and lost in critique then?

No, critique is about getting comments about your corps and perhaps pointing out why you disagree with some of those comments. Shows are won and lost on the field and nowhere else.

[MikeD]

So the Game really does seem to be important... are shows won and lost in critique then?

Maybe because the 'fame' as you call it is that staffs get a consensus of opinions about what works and doesn't work (and everwhere in between) and then may or may not make revisions. That's about as old as competitive drum corps.

A staff can't possibly think of everythnig at once when designing a show. Tweaking and revising helps make for a better show most of the time, IMO.

As for pleasing judges...that too is age-old. Not sure what the issue is there.